Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/eclipseo/packaging/b23e0cc/ddgr.spec SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/eclipseo/ddgr/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00706144-ddgr/ddgr-1.2-1.fc28.src.rpm Description: <description here> ddgr is a cmdline utility to search DuckDuckGo from the terminal. While googler is highly popular among cmdline users, in many forums the need of a similar utility for privacy-aware DuckDuckGo came up. DuckDuckGo Bangs are super-cool too! So here's ddgr for you! Unlike the web interface, you can specify the number of search results you would like to see per page. It's more convenient than skimming through 30-odd search results per page. The default interface is carefully designed to use minimum space without sacrificing readability. ddgr isn't affiliated to DuckDuckGo in any way. Fedora Account System Username: eclipseo
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - The license header in "ddgr" (the Python script) says: > # This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify > # it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by > # the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or > # (at your option) any later version. So I think the license tag should actually be GPLv3+, not GPLv3. - The fish and zsh directories under /usr/share are unowned, since those shells aren't dependencies. Therefore I believe this package needs to own them too. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/fish/vendor_functions.d, /usr/share/zsh/site-functions, /usr/share/fish, /usr/share/zsh Everything else looks good. ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 11 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bjr/Programming/fedora/reviews/1539209-ddgr/licensecheck.txt [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/fish/vendor_functions.d, /usr/share/zsh/site-functions, /usr/share/fish, /usr/share/zsh [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %license. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: ddgr-1.2-1.fc28.noarch.rpm ddgr-1.2-1.fc28.src.rpm ddgr.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cmdline -> decline ddgr.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US googler -> google, googles, googled ddgr.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cmdline -> decline ddgr.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US googler -> google, googles, googled 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory ddgr.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cmdline -> decline ddgr.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US googler -> google, googles, googled ddgr.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/jarun/ddgr <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. Requires -------- ddgr (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python3 Provides -------- ddgr: ddgr Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/jarun/ddgr/archive/v1.2/ddgr-1.2.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : a9828b8863949dc93dd574a15b6779d9390b6f5e277e35c157064d7c06423758 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : a9828b8863949dc93dd574a15b6779d9390b6f5e277e35c157064d7c06423758 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1539209 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/eclipseo/packaging/ff0547c/ddgr.spec SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/eclipseo/ddgr/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00711537-ddgr/ddgr-1.2-1.fc28.src.rpm
Spec diff: https://github.com/eclipseo/packaging/commit/ff0547c1873a4eaaaa0ef8b3b42ffba0aa953b14#diff-1de3ee05e65db39bd52da3b02c701966 Thanks for the reviews!
Excellent, package approved.
(fedrepo-req-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ddgr. You may commit to the branch "f27" in about 10 minutes.
ddgr-1.2-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-1ed409d72c
ddgr-1.2-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-bcd841f6d6
ddgr-1.2-1.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-bcd841f6d6
ddgr-1.2-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-1ed409d72c
ddgr-1.2-1.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
ddgr-1.2-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.